Wouldn't it be cool if M3 and B3 went 35 mph?

[Boody]

Going to M3 from M2 was a pretty big change in speed from 36 to 34 and as Smart said, its still hard!  Bob LaPoint brought this up but I think he is on to something, make B3 and M3 adjust by 1 mph insead of 2.  Makes sense, and easier transition from 36.  The only problem I see is how to score it since 36 is 6 bouy difference than 34. 

[RichardDoane]

It took years to get the Men4 Jump speed changed, so don't hold your breathe

[bmiller3536]

the difference between 34.2 and 36 is .87 seconds...not really that big of an adjustment

[ScarletArrow]

Boody I had a very similar thought at the Midwest Regionals this past weekend.  I would like to see M2, M3, M4 age and speed requirements modified a bit.

[Than_Bogan]

Only barely on topic, but I swear 34 mph has been harder on my body than 36 was.  Obviously getting older isn't helping my resiliency, but at 34 there is such a tendency to try to muscle my way back into it, and to hold onto stuff that is hitting me pretty hard.  At 36, when I'd get into trouble like that, I'd just be done.  Also, I believe -38 is inherently more of a "taking hits" pass than -35, regardless of speed.  So the fact that I can (or could back when I was 100% healthy) challenge -38 at 34mph seems to mean more getting bashed around.

So in some ways I wonder what the "point" is of going to 34.  I don't think I particularly like the idea of 35, but I think it might be time to revisit when the transition to 34 should happen.

It's safe to say that equipment, technique, and physical conditioning have all improved tremendously, so the situation now is quite different from when these rules were created.

[HO 410]

If you were to bump Big Dawg back up to 36mph, and give enough warning to practice, would everyone just fall back a pass or would the stratification be greater than that?

[Than_Bogan]

I'm not at the Big Dawg level, but I did goof around at 36 for one session this year, and I was surprised how little adjustment there was.  I lost one pass and otherwise everything felt pretty darn similar.

[MrJones]

We have discussed this before, but there is no good reason that M3/M4 are going 34. As I have said, if my wife can have 3 kids and still go the same speed as Open Women until she is 52 years old then us guys should do the same.

I truly believe the reason that AWSA moved M3 and above to 34mph was to keep guys in their prime earning years in the sport. By the time you hit 35 a lot of people are maxing out on what they can run buoy count wise. That might get them to think about moving on to golf, fly fishing, or whatever. If they all the sudden pick up a pass by going 34 it keeps them hooked. (and buying boats, skis, USA waterski memberships, etc.) If they stay hooked for a few more years it gives their kids time to get started skiing and "bang" they are locked in to buying stuff for another 15 years.

What I would like would be to do away with 34 until M5. That's not going to happen, so how about making Masters Men a truely distinct division by making it for anybody over 35 who wants to continue and ski at 36. This would give it much more of it's own identity and do away with all the moving around of skiers between M3-5 and MM.

Maybe I got off on a different track here, but I would much prefer to stay at 36 than at some sort of hybrid speed.

 

[Jody_Seal]

Gentlemen, As per our rules any men 3,4,5,6 can opt  to ski at 36 mph if they choose to do so. I would rather see a sandbagger rule and get a lot of these guy's that run deep 39 and better out of the age group classes and into the MM class. maybe we could start a sanbagger thred!!! LOL!!!

As for boy's 3 that will never happen because it is a international jr class the rest of the world runs 58K.

[Than_Bogan]

But opting to 36 as a men 3/4/5/6 still *counts* as 34 -- so it's a strict disadvantage to do so.  If it were just directly off zero-based scoring (e.g. 6 @ 58/13m ties 6 @ 55/12m), and the skier's option whether to set the boat speed at 34 or 36, then it's a level playing field.  But that would be pretty strange, as it would introduce yet another variable to play with when trying to optimize performance.  Skiers would be tempted to practice at each and try to figure out which speed results in a better ZBS buoy count for them.  Combined with ZO, there would 18 possible options off the starting dock!

So I think everyone is better off if the speed is simply set.  And I think at this point it might as well stay at 36 quite a bit longer.  This is awkward to transition in, though.  Would someone like me who is half way through M3 go back to 36?  I don't have a problem with that, but it seems weird.  Or would we create M3A (for new skiers entering Men III) and M3B (for those already in) and slowly phase out M3B?

About MM, I think I have kind of the opposite view of jody.  I don't like how it takes the best skiers out of their division, meaning that every place in M3/4/5/6 comes with an asterisk.  I feel the same way about Open, actually.  I have NO problem with these divisions existing, but I object to having "overlapping" divisions in any given tournament.  I'm completely fine with tournaments that don't offer M3/4/5/6, like Big Dawg, or pro style tournametns that don't offer B3/M1/M2.  But when a competitor has a CHOICE of divisions to compete in, I feel it taints the results of whichever division that skier chooses NOT to ski in.

Admittedly, this is kind of a minor point, but I think about these things... /vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-smile.gif

[MrJones]

Jody,

Granted. I have skied a lot of area class C/R tournaments over the past 5 years at 36mph in M3. In these I am just skiing against myself and my PB so it doesn't really matter what speed I am at. The problem is if you want to "compete" against others (i.e. State, Regionals, Nationals) you are giving a huge advantage to the guy who is skiing at 34.

IMHO, the whole "sandbagger" thing is a complete waste of time. No matter where the cut off line is performance wise, there will always be someone who's best skiing will be just below that point. If you bump anyone who runs 38 into MM automatically, then there will be a guy who consistantly runs 5 but can't get over the hump. All the sudden he will be king and the guys who only run 4 will be mad at him. Where does it end?

That is another reason for making MM 36mph. I think the current set up dilutes the competition at Nationals. Back in the day M3 was the best division to watch at Nats. I remember watching Chuck Forrest and the boys fight it out for years. The big division may be M4 now, but having some of the best skiers out of M3-4-5 skiing in MM takes a lot of the drama out. (Again IMHO)

[schroed]

 

Why don't we just change the way the age groups are setup?  Many sports just have classifications for people over a certain age and don't put a top end age in the group.  For example, make mens 2 an over 25 age group that goes 36 mph.  Then if you're older than 35 you could still sign up in that group and go 36 mph.  If your over 35 and want to go 34 mph then sign up in the over 35 age group.

 Perhaps we could combine the above philosphy with a reduction of divisions.  With the number of members declining in USA Waterski it seems like at some point the number fo divsions should be reduced to encourage better competion.   When was the last time the number of divisions was reduced?  Having two or three people in a division at regionals is kinda rediculous.

[Jody_Seal]

Mens division 36 MPH any age !!! Good idea but trying to impliment it is another problem.

As for anyone running 38 should be in MM, No not my thinking but would like to see the cut off over three at 39. Their is another thred that is going is skiing dying? well  one of the issues in the big picture is truly ability fairness! I have a wrestling mentality and do not belive that everyone should get a medal for participation but one of the aspects of our sport having difficulty's is the number of great skiers sking in age divisions where they dominate rather then skiing in a MM/open division, this tends to run off good skiers as they feel they do not have a chance against these elite level skiers skiiing in age division. after all I think we are all after the same thing in this sport and that is skiing to the best we can and enjoying what we do but it gets old when a skier runs a few at 35 and has to ski against a skier for a state or regional or even national champiponship that has the ability to win a elite world level event either as a pro or amature.
Me personally have not skied in a tournament in 2 years, mostly because ZO has kick my ass (another problem in the big picture). I have now just begun being able to run some decent slalom with the zo and for me and now go into the men 5 division and will start skiing a few tournaments again. This division does not get any easier but attrition brings the playing field a little closer and their are not so many elite level skiers in it.

[MrJones]

Schroed

I agree completely with what you are saying. From what I understand Canada is set up that way. Once you go past 35 you can either age up/out to 34mph divisions or stay in M2 at 36. (Please correct me if I am wrong BTW)

Jody

Then just change my previous comment to read "the guy who consistantly runs 2@39 will be king" instead. See what I mean. It is either a real "who's best" competition or we break it up so much a title is meaningless.

As another aside, I noticed Morgan skied Open at Southern Regionals. I guess he has won enough lately at 34 and wants to ski some 36. I don't think he is going to win against CP, Rossi, etc., but I think it is cool he is skiing open. Wouldn't a 36 mph MM be a lot more attractive to a guy like him? What about retired pros who still ski? Right now they are in a spot where it is hard for them to keep skiing. If they drop down to age division they would be called sandbaggers. If they skied open they would likely get their buts kicked which would be hard on the ego.

 Fun discussion. Sorry to hijack this thing.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Great discussion!  I’ll add a couple of points to the fray.

 

Years ago, when the speed drop hit at 35 years old, 35 was considered OLD.  There were very few really fit skiers at that age and the reduction in speed was appropriate.  Today, the fitness level of the over 35 group is an order of magnitude above what it was 20-30 years ago, and many skiers can easily continue at 36.  So bumping the speed up to 36 for M3 should be easyJ.  (Boys 3 should go 38!)

 

On the MM and sandbaggers, the really sensible way out is to have the top 3 finishers at Regionals and the top 5 at Nationals in M3 and M4, required to ski MM for the next ski year.  I don’t think anyone is going to stand up and avoid a placement just to avoid having to go to MM and it would really open things up for the next tier of skiers, plus make MM a really exciting division.  Yes, go ahead and make it a 36mph division while we’re at it.

 But that would be too logical….. won’t happenL

[adam]

I agree 100% with everything Scot is saying.  I see absolutely no reason for M3 to ski 34.  I liked it when M3 was allowed to ski 36, but it made absolutely no sense to score it as if it was skied at 34.  What is up with that!  We should use zero based scoring with it.  It is not unfair because everyone has the option of skiing either speed.  It is unfair to score someone skiing 36 the same as if they were skiing 34 though.  I'm entering M4 after Nationals and if that division used ZBS with the option of skiing 36, I'd still do it.

MM is another topic.  I'm not sure it really makes sense with the way it is implemented.  The speed is the same, it just dilutes the M3-M4 divisions.  If MM is going to be an elite separate division, it should be at least a little faster (35) or the full 36.  If MM is at 36, it should be easier to qualify for and the open qualification should stay the same for the open division.  I guess that once a MM skier reaches a certain level, he should be required to ski Open, though I'm on the fence on that.

 Just my .02 FWIW.

Adam

 

[animal]

If you have MM at 36, whats the difference between it and open?

[skidawg]

The difference would be skiin against me n jones or parish n rossi

[ForrestGump]

Can I choose none of the above? LOL

[adam]

Animal:  Not much of a difference between open and MM if the speed is 36.  It would be kind of like pro verse semi pro or simply another division like between M1 and M2.  I'm not really a huge fan of MM because the speed is the same and it dilutes the other divisions at nationals.  I am for using ZBS and still allow M3/M4 to go 36 if they choose.

[MrJones]

adam,

I would say that Open would be for the guys skiing pro events, living at/running ski schools, etc., and that MM would be for "normal" guys who want to continue on at 36mph. (No, I wouldn't make anybody ski in any division. This is only waterskiing after all) I do not think that there should be a minimum score for entry to MM either. You can have a PB at 32 or 39 and still just like 36 better.

Bruce,

So women were in better shape than the guys 20-30 years ago, hence they stayed at 34mph when they hit 35 years of age??? I don't buy 34 being easier on your body at all. More load, ability to hang on to more crap, etc. Look at what the manufacturers are doing with skis. They are making them bigger for 34 so you don't sink! Just stay at 36 and avoid the issue.

This is fun!!